Next Article in Journal
Crustaceans in the Meiobenthos and Plankton of the Thermokarst Lakes and Polygonal Ponds in the Lena River Delta (Northern Yakutia, Russia): Species Composition and Factors Regulating Assemblage Structures
Next Article in Special Issue
Estimating Phosphorus and COD Concentrations Using a Hybrid Soft Sensor: A Case Study in a Norwegian Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of Integrating SWAT Model into a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards Reliable Rainwater Harvesting Systems
Previous Article in Special Issue
Study of the Water Quality Index and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon for a River Receiving Treated Landfill Leachate
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

What Effect Does Rehabilitation of Wastewater Pipelines Have on the Share of Infiltration and Inflow Water (I/I-Water)?

Water 2021, 13(14), 1934; https://doi.org/10.3390/w13141934
by Kristin Jenssen Sola 1,2,*, Jarle Tommy Bjerkholt 1,3, Oddvar Georg Lindholm 1 and Harsha Ratnaweera 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Water 2021, 13(14), 1934; https://doi.org/10.3390/w13141934
Submission received: 26 May 2021 / Revised: 6 July 2021 / Accepted: 10 July 2021 / Published: 13 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Water Quality Monitoring and Modeling Research)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript considers the very important problem of the effect of wastwater pipelines rehabilitation on share of of infiltration and inflow water (I/I-water). To address this issue, the authors propose implementation a method based on comparing data from rehabilitation areas to areas where no measures.

This is a methodological paper and the methods used are well described.

However, I have some comments on this manuscript that need to be corrected

Although the authors mention various factors influencing the level of the I/I water inflow, only the quality of the pipeline and the amount of rainfall are analyzed.

There are no information about:

- soil-water conditions in the compared areas - can be completely different and influnce the results in different ways

- does the stream in the Vaka area infiltrate or drain the area?

- the level of ground surface coverage with pavement or roads (e.g. concrete) in the compared areas (the size of the rainwater catchment area)

- rainwater sewage systems and their efficiency in the studied areas. In this context, the importance of manholes for the water inflow

I think that the text should be supplemented with this information and discussed in the discussion paragraph.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

your paper is interesting and potentially worth of publication, but in its present version there are some major issues that can be solved prior to publish it.

First, the English needs to be improved.

The abstract is too short and very generic and should be reorganized at all.

The introduction needs a general reorganization, first introducing the general problem and after pointing at the specific case of Norway.

Methods and study area description need some improvements: more details about the instruments used, more maps for better describing the physical systems you studied.

Results and discussions need more text about the different nature of precipitations (rain and snow) and the role of surface runoff and groundwater circulation in influencing the I/I rate.

Please find in the attached pdf my detailed comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript entitled „What effect does rehabilitation of wastewater pipelines have on the share of Infiltration and Inflow water (I/I-water)?” has been sufficiently improved to warrant publication in Water. I accept this work in present form.

Author Response

Thank you.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors, I found the revised version of your manuscript significantly improved and worth of publication after few minor revisions. Please consider my comments in the attached pdf.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

  • I have changed the map in figure 1 and removed the brackets from figure 2
  • I have corrected/improved the spelling based on the comments
Back to TopTop